Community perceptions of ecosystem services, drivers of degradation, and proposed conservation actions for Denbiq Wetland in West Gojam, Ethiopia

@ BioRisk

BioRisk 23: 45-61 (2025)
DOI: 10.3897/biorisk.23.156866

Research Article

Community perceptions of ecosystem services, drivers of
degradation, and proposed conservation actions for Denbigq
Wetland in West Gojam, Ethiopia

Kebebush Mulat Alem'®

1 Ethiopian Biodiversity Institute, RO. Box 30726, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia
Corresponding author: Kebebush Mulat Alem (kebemu2011@gmail.com)

OPEN Qaceess

Academic editor: Josef Settele
Received: 24 April 2025
Accepted: 17 July 2025
Published: 12 August 2025

Citation: Alem KM (2025) Community
perceptions of ecosystem services,
drivers of degradation, and proposed
conservation actions for Denbig
Wetland in West Gojam, Ethiopia.
BioRisk 23: 45-61. https://doi.
org/10.3897/biorisk.23.156866

Copyright: © Kebebush Mulat Alem.
This is an open access article distributed under
terms of the Creative Commons Attribution

License (Attribution 4.0 International - CC BY 4.0).

Abstract

Denbig Wetland, located in Bure Woreda of West Gojam, Ethiopia, provides essential eco-
system services that support local livelihoods and biodiversity. This study assessed the
wetland’s ecological functions, the socio-economic factors contributing to its degrada-
tion, and community-driven conservation strategies. Primary data were collected through
structured questionnaires, interviews, focus group discussions, and field observations
from a randomly selected sample of 202 households. Descriptive statistics and binary lo-
gistic regression were used for analysis. The findings show that the wetland offers diverse
ecosystem services, including provisioning (freshwater, fodder, fruits), regulating (water
purification, temperature control), cultural (recreation, tourism), and supporting (habitat,
organic matter accumulation) functions. Logistic regression revealed statistically signif-
icant influences (p < 0.01): household size was negatively associated with wetland con-
dition, while landholding size and age had positive impacts. Key drivers of degradation
include agricultural expansion, overgrazing, reduced upland crop productivity, and limited
grazing land. The local community showed strong awareness of, and support for, interven-
tions such as awareness campaigns, establishing buffer zones, and grazing control. These
findings underscore the need for integrated, community-based and policy-supported wet-
land management to maintain ecosystem function while supporting rural livelihoods.

Key words: Denbigq, drivers of change, ecosystem services, sustainable use, wetland
management

Introduction

Wetlands are among the most valuable and fragile ecosystems on Earth, providing
a wide array of ecological, economic, and cultural benefits (Xu et al. 2019). They
regulate hydrological cycles, support biodiversity, sequester carbon, moderate lo-
cal climate conditions, and contribute to food and water security (Junk et al. 2013;
Lamsal et al. 2015). Wetlands provide four major categories of ecosystem services:
provisioning services (e.g., freshwater, fodder, fuelwood, wild food); regulating ser-
vices (e.g., climate regulation, flood control, water purification); cultural services
(e.g., recreation, spiritual significance, education); and supporting services (e.g.,
nutrient cycling, habitat provision, soil formation) (Wallace 2007; Junk et al. 2013).

45

Kebebush Mulat Alem: Community views, threats, and conservation plans for Denbig Wetland, Ethiopia

Globally, the perception of wetlands has changed significantly over the last
few decades. Formerly dismissed as unproductive “wastelands,” they are now
recognized for their ecological significance and socio-economic value (Mar-
tinez-Juarez et al. 2015; Darwall et al. 2018). In Ethiopia, wetlands have long
played a role in supporting rural livelihoods through resource provision, eco-
logical regulation, and cultural importance (Wondie 2018). Yet despite this
importance, many Ethiopian wetlands are under accelerating pressure from
agricultural expansion, settlement growth, water diversion, and infrastructure
development (Gebresllassie et al. 2014). Underlying drivers include rapid popu-
lation growth, weak and fragmented environmental governance, market failures
linked to the undervaluation of ecosystem services, and insecure land tenure
(Hoe and Lian 2021). These pressures are exacerbated by limited hydrologi-
cal data, poor watershed management, and a general lack of monitoring and
enforcement capacity (Giweta 2018). Although there has been growing aware-
ness of wetlands’ importance, conservation efforts often remain fragmented
and reactive, rather than proactive and integrated.

A persistent barrier to effective wetland management in Ethiopia is the fail-
ure to bridge scientific assessments with local community knowledge and par-
ticipation (Kakuru et al. 2013; Giweta 2018). Most conservation efforts have
either ignored or insufficiently incorporated community perspectives, resulting
in limited impact. Top-down conservation initiatives that overlook local values
and livelihood realities often achieve limited long-term impact. Moreover, in-
terventions framed around ecosystem services are seldom evaluated for so-
cio-economic outcomes, reducing opportunities for adaptive management.
Addressing these gaps requires site-specific, participatory assessments that
combine ecological, socio-economic, and governance dimensions.

Denbig Wetland, located in the West Gojam Zone (Bure Woreda) of the Amha-
ra Region, exemplifies these challenges. The wetland supplies freshwater, graz-
ing land, medicinal plants, and cultural and spiritual value for local communities.
However, it faces mounting pressures, including agricultural encroachment,
nutrient loading from nearby farms, loss of native vegetation, and pollution.
Although local awareness exists, conservation measures remain fragmented,
inconsistent, and weakly institutionalized. Despite some local awareness of the
wetland’s importance, conservation actions have been inconsistent and insuffi-
cient. Scientific data on the wetland’s ecological status are scarce, and existing
initiatives lack coordination and long-term vision. Moreover, policies and inter-
ventions have tended to be top-down, with minimal community involvement or
contextual adaptation, further limiting their effectiveness.

While various threats to Ethiopian wetlands have been broadly recognized
in policy and literature, there remains a critical research gap in site-specific, in-
tegrated assessments that combine both ecological data and local knowledge
(Aazami and Shanazi 2020). Existing studies often focus on biophysical chang-
es or land cover dynamics in isolation, while overlooking the social dimensions
and local drivers of wetland transformation. Moreover, many past interventions
whether government-led or externally funded have lacked continuity, failed to
gain community ownership, or did not address the socio-economic incentives
that fuel unsustainable use.

In the case of Denbiq Wetland, there is limited empirical research evaluating
its ecosystem services, degradation drivers, or local conservation knowledge.

BioRisk 23: 45-61 (2025), DOI: 10.3897/biorisk.23.156866 46

Kebebush Mulat Alem: Community views, threats, and conservation plans for Denbiq Wetland, Ethiopia

Although some efforts have been made to raise awareness and promote sus-
tainable practices, they have not been systematically assessed or widely imple-
mented. As a result, degradation persists, and the wetland'’s potential to sup-
port both ecological and human systems is increasingly compromised.

This study addresses these gaps through an integrated, community-based
assessment of Denbiq Wetland. Specifically, it: (i) characterizes household so-
cio-economic conditions and dependence on wetland resources; (ii) documents
community perceptions of ecosystem services across provisioning, regulating,
cultural, and supporting categories; (iii) identifies perceived drivers of wetland deg-
radation; (iv) tests socio-economic predictors of wetland sustenance/degradation
using binary logistic regression; and (v) documents locally proposed conservation
and management interventions. The research findings will offer concrete recom-
mendations that can inform future conservation planning, not only for Denbig Wet-
land but also for other similarly threatened wetlands in the Ethiopian highlands.

Materials and methods

Description of the study area

The study was conducted in Denbig Wetland, located in Bure Woreda, within the
West Gojam Zone of the Amhara Region, North West Ethiopia. Geographically,
the area lies at 10°42'N and 37°4'E, approximately 415 km northwest of Addis
Ababa and 150 km southwest of Bahir Dar. The wetland covers an estimated
3,123 hectares, and primarily fed by the Denbig spring, surface runoff, and sea-
sonal precipitation from the upper catchment.

The region receives an annual rainfall ranging from 1386 to 1757 mm, follow-
ing amonomodal rainfall pattern concentrated between May to September (Erki-
hun et al. 2015). This rainfall pattern, combined with the varied elevation 713 to
2604 meters above sea level, creates distinct agroecological zones, moist and
wet lowland (10%), wet Woina-Dega (82%), and wet Dega (8%) (Adamu et al.
2019). These zones significantly influence wetland hydrology through runoff vol-
ume, infiltration rate, and erosional potential. For instance, steep slopes in high-
lands contribute to sediment deposition, while intensive land use in the lower ar-
eas affects the wetland'’s natural retention capacity and groundwater recharge.

Temperature ranges from 14 °C to 24 °C annually, supporting diverse agri-
cultural practices. The surrounding land is heavily cultivated, and the proximity
of farming activities to the wetland accelerates nutrient loading and vegetation
loss, particularly in the northern part, which is degraded due to crop encroach-
ment and overgrazing (Fig. 1). In contrast, the eastern sections retain native
shrubs and grasses that provide habitat for wetland fauna.

Socio-economically, Bure is primarily agrarian, with the majority of the pop-
ulation engaged in mixed crop-livestock farming. Major crops include maize,
teff, sorghum, and barley, cultivated in a subsistence-oriented farming system.
Landholding sizes are generally small, and population density is relatively high,
which places intense pressure on natural resources, including wetlands. Com-
munity dependence on Denbig Wetland is high, with local livelihoods benefiting
from water supply, grazing land, traditional medicine, and seasonal wild har-
vests. However, limited awareness and lack of formal management structures
have made the wetland vulnerable to unsustainable use and degradation.

BioRisk 23: 45-61 (2025), DOI: 10.3897/biorisk.23.156866 47

Kebebush Mulat Alem: Community views, threats, and conservation plans for Denbig Wetland, Ethiopia

ar? are

= S
S [| Ethio regions s
5 ra Amhara woredas %
z [| Bure woreda Z
Fs F
é iol Dinbg wetland &
+ 45 3

Iroesare ar rare ars Se ar Fare a4 Sre eae are are rare

Figure 1. Map of the study area.
Research design and data collection

The study was carried out in four selected kebeles Wadera, Denbun, Tiya Tiya,
and Alfa. These Kebeles were deliberately selected based on three criteria: 1.
The extent of wetland area within each Kebeles, 2. Intensity of wetland utiliza-
tion for agricultural and pastoral purposes, and 3. The community's perceived
reliance on wetland ecosystem services. This stratified selection ensured rep-
resentation of gradients in pressure and use intensity. The research employed
the ecosystem service classification proposed by Wallace (2007), which di-
vides services into provisioning, supporting, regulating, and cultural categories.
Data collection includes household survey, focus group discussions, key infor-
mant interviews, and field observations. For the households’ survey respon-
dents were randomly sampled to ensure proportional representation from each
kebele. Structured questionnaires were used to collect data on demographic
characteristics, livelihood strategies, perceptions on wetland benefits, and
awareness of conservation practices. The questionnaire was adapted from An-
derson and Davis (2013) translated into the local language, and refined through
a preliminary pretest to ensure clarity and cultural relevance.

A combination of data collection methods was employed. Focus group
discussions were conducted in each kebele, with six to eight participants
chosen based on their reliance on wetland resources. Four FGDs were held
in total one per kebele balancing diversity and logistical feasibility, while
ensuring representation across gender, age, and livelihood groups. Each
discussion followed a structured guide covering wetland services, change
trends, and drivers of degradation.

BioRisk 23: 45-61 (2025), DOI: 10.3897/biorisk.23.156866 48

Kebebush Mulat Alem: Community views, threats, and conservation plans for Denbig Wetland, Ethiopia

Twelve key informants were selected purposively, including local elders, de-
velopment agents, agricultural office, and community leaders. The number was
chosen to ensure coverage of key stakeholder perspectives while maintaining
depth of engagement. Qualitative data from FGDs and key informants were
analyzed using thematic content analysis. Transcripts were reviewed, coded
manually, and grouped into thematic categories reflecting perceptions, drivers
of change, and suggested conservation actions. This allowed for systematic
interpretation of patterns across interviews.

Field observations were conducted in two phases: a preliminary site visit for
logistical planning, and a detailed survey during primary data collection to ob-
serve environmental conditions, land use patterns, and vegetation cover. These
observations helped validate community responses and triangulate data.

Sample frame and sampling techniques

Four sample Kebeles surrounding Denbig wetland were included in the sam-
pling frame. Household respondents were selected using simple random sam-
pling proportional to kebele household population. Sample size was determined
using Yamane (1976) formula at + 7% precision and 95% confidence level:

ON
"Tr + N(e2)]

Where n is the required total sample size of respondents, N is the total house-
hold (22771) in all sample Kebeles, e is the minimum level of precision (0.07),
where the confidence level is 95% at P = + 5 (maximum variability).

22771
l- eoCoC--_—_—
[1 + 22771(0.0049)|

Accordingly, a total of 202 households, 50 (24%) from Alefa kebele, 44
(21.5%) from Tiya Tiya, 60 (32%) from Denbun, and 47 (22.5%) households from
Wadera kebele were randomly selected for interview (Table 1). In addition, 12
key informants and four Focus group discussions (each group consisting of 6
individuals) were involved and participated in the study. Members of the Focus
group discussions were selected purposively.

= 202

Data analysis

The data collected from the household survey were analyzed using the Statis-
tical Package for Social Scientists version 26.0. The analysis involved both de-
scriptive statistics and logistic regression to interpret the findings effectively.

Table 1. Total household heads (HHH) and sampled respondents by kebele.

Sample HHH
Kebeles Total HHH
Males Females Total Percentage (%)
Alefa 5,563 46 4 24
Tiya Tiya 4,575 38 6 21-5
Wadera 5)326 42 5 225)
Denbun 7,307 54 6 32
Total 22,771 181 21 100

BioRisk 23: 45-61 (2025), DOI: 10.3897/biorisk.23.156866 49

Kebebush Mulat Alem: Community views, threats, and conservation plans for Denbig Wetland, Ethiopia

Descriptive statistics were used to summarize general trends, while a binary
logistic regression model was applied to explore relationships between vari-
ables. This approach provided a comprehensive understanding of both broad
patterns and deeper variable interactions. The regression model utilized was
based on the linear regression framework outlined by Gujarati (2004).

Y =a + B1X1 + B2X2 + B3X3 + B4X4 + BHX5 + BOXG + BTX7 + B&X8+ v

where: Y = dependent variable (degradation/loss of wetlands), a = constant,
X1-X8 are independent variables; that is, X1 = Location, and, X2 = age of
the respondents, X3 = gender of the respondents, X4 = family size, X5 = ed-
ucational level, X6 = Occupation, X7 = land size, X8 = Tropical livestock unit
(TLU) and u = error term (residual).Values 81-88 are the parameters es-
timated (i.e., the respective coefficients of the independent variables X1-
X8. Focusing on statistical significance and effect size allows us to identify
which household factors or socio-economic characteristics played a key
role in wetland degradation. Thus, a procedure was performed to test the
null hypothesis, B1 = B2 = B3 = B = n, against the alternative hypothesis,
which is that the null hypothesis is not true in at least one case. The data
obtained from focus group discussion and field observation were written in
the form of verbal/narrative information.

Results

Socio-demographic characteristics and livelihood

Understanding the demographic composition of local communities is cru-
cial for informed policy-making, strategic planning, and effective natural re-
source management, particularly when it comes to the sustainable use and
restoration of wetlands. In this study, structured questionnaires were admin-
istered to 202 household heads. The findings indicated that the majority of
respondents came from male-headed households, comprising 89.6%, where-
as female-headed households accounted for 10.4% (Table 2). The average
respondent age was 40 years, with participants ranging between 25 and 61
years. Regarding educational background, 17.8% of respondents were illiter-
ate and unable to read or write. Additionally, 26.7% had completed primary
school, 36.8% had attained secondary education, and 16.8% had pursued
college-level studies (Table 2). Agriculture was the primary occupation for
most respondents, with 83.7% identifying as farmers. Other professions,
such as government employment and self-employment, constituted a small-
er percentage of the surveyed population have played a crucial role in pro-
viding provisioning, regulating, and cultural benefits to local communities.

A significant portion of respondents (94.5%) were engaged in crop farming,
while others participated in additional economic activities, including livestock
rearing (32.4%), vegetable farming (59.7%), small-scale trade (4.5%), and har-
vesting wetland resources such as reeds, thatching grass, and wild fruits (Table
2). While there were minor differences among the wetlands in the four kebeles,
Dembun and Tiya Tiya wetlands were found to be heavily impacted by agricul-
tural expansion, livestock grazing, drainage, and seasonal recession farming,

BioRisk 23: 45-61 (2025), DOI: 10.3897/biorisk.23.156866 50

Kebebush Mulat Alem: Community views, threats, and conservation plans for Denbig Wetland, Ethiopia

Table 2. Socio-demographic information of respondents (n = 202).

Sociodemographic Participated respondents
variable Category Number (%)
Gender Male 181 89.6
Female 21 10.4

Age <40 92 45.5
41-50 68 33.7

>51 42 20.8

Education Can't read and write 36 17.8
Primary education 54 26.7

Secondary education 78 38.6

College 34 16.8

Residence Born 180 89.1
Immigrants Ze 10.9

Occupation Farmer 169 83.7

Gov't employed 6 | 3

Merchant and farmer 27 13.4

Source of income Crop production 192 94.5
Vegetables and fruits 108 59.7

Livestock 45 32.4

Trade 9 | 4.5

particularly in the dry season. Tiya Tiya wetland lacked buffer vegetation,
whereas the Debun Kebele wetland was relatively covered by the Nile grass
species (Berbeza). Meanwhile, Alefa and Wadera wetlands were predominantly
occupied by Typha lotifolia and Cyperus papyrus reed species. This consistency
underscores their fundamental role in sustaining both human livelihoods and
environmental well-being.

Livestock holdings, land size, and household characteristics

Household characteristics showed wide ranges (Table 3). Family size ranged
from 1 to 12 persons (mean 5.19 + 1.90). Livestock holdings (number, proxy
for TLU) ranged from 0 to 19 animals (mean 7.2 + 5.1). Cultivated land aver-
aged 1.38 + 0.89 ha (range 0.15-4 ha); grazing land averaged 0.59 + 0.38 ha
(range 0.10—-5 ha); homestead plots 0-0.5 ha (mean 0.15 + 0.12 ha); wood-
lots O-1.75 ha (mean 0.44 + 0.22 ha). Some households reported having no
land at all and were dependent on sharecropping or common lands. House-
holds with extensive livestock relied heavily on wetland grazing; land-poor
households harvested wetland grasses (cheff) for sale and used wetland
water for household and small-plot irrigation.

Table 3. Household characteristics, livestock population, and land holding in hectares.

Variables Minimum | Maximum Mean + S.d
Family size 1 12 5.19+1.9
Number of livestock 0 19 7245.1
Cultivated land (ha) 0.15 4 1.38 + 0.89
Grazing land (ha) 0.1 | 5 0.59 + 0.38
Homestead (ha) 0 0.5 0.15+0.12
Woodlot (ha) 0 175 0.44 +0.22

BioRisk 23: 45-61 (2025), DOI: 10.3897/biorisk.23.156866 5]

Kebebush Mulat Alem: Community views, threats, and conservation plans for Denbig Wetland, Ethiopia

Ecosystem service in Denbiq Wetland

Wetlands provide vital ecosystem services, including water filtration, flood con-
trol, carbon storage, and habitat for biodiversity. They improve water quality by
trapping pollutants, reducing erosion, and supporting fisheries and agriculture.
Wetlands also regulate climate by storing carbon and buffering against ex-
treme weather, benefiting both nature and human communities. Respondents
exhibited varying levels of awareness about the ecosystem services provided
by the wetland (Table 4). Approximately 36.6% were not informed, while 28.2%
were moderately informed. Education level and locality significantly influenced
awareness (p < 0.01). Respondents with higher education demonstrated great-
er recognition of the wetland’s ecological functions.

Provisioning services

The Denbig Wetland provides a range of provisioning services that are crucial
to the livelihoods of surrounding communities. The high level of recognition
among respondents reflects their direct dependence on the wetland for their
livelihoods. A significant portion of household's reported utilizing the wetland
primarily for water-related needs water for livestock (70.9%), domestic use
(60.4%), and irrigation (40%) (Table 7). Beyond water access, the wetland also
supports agriculture and household economies through fodder and grazing re-
sources (65.3%), thatching grass (48.5%), and wood for fuel and construction
purposes (30.5%). A smaller proportion of respondents (10.2%) indicated the
use of the wetland for medicinal plant collection, highlighting its supplementa-
ry role in traditional health practices.

These provisioning services are particularly essential in areas like Alefa and
Wadera, where crop production forms the backbone of local livelihoods. This
strong agricultural dependence further illustrates the community's reliance on
the wetland not only as a natural resource base but also as a critical contributor
to household income and food security.

Regulating services

Denbiq Wetland offers several important regulating services, including
temperature regulation through carbon sequestration (50.5%), water puri-
fication (61.6%), erosion control (70.5%), and sediment retention (47.4%)
(Table 7). The wetland’s ability to store water during the wet season and
provide it during the dry season exemplifies how wetlands support local

Table 4. Respondents’ level of awareness of ecosystem services from Denbig Wetland.

Chi-square (x2)

Response Frequency % Educational level Respondent locality
Fully Informed 23 11.4 26:6* 24.4*
Informed 48 23.8
Moderately Informed 57 28.2
Not informed 74 36.6

*\2 significant at p < 0.01.

BioRisk 23: 45-61 (2025), DOI: 10.3897/biorisk.23.156866 52

Kebebush Mulat Alem: Community views, threats, and conservation plans for Denbig Wetland, Ethiopia

climate resilience and water management. More than 50% of respondents
recognized that nearly all wetland types play a crucial role in flood regu-
lation, water purification, and sediment retention (Table 7). The table also
reveals a higher recognition of erosion control (70.5%) and a lower percep-
tion of sediment retention (47.4%). Additionally, experts and field observa-
tions noted that wetlands impacted by urbanization tend to provide stronger
pollution control services.

Cultural services

The primary benefit provided by Denbig Wetland is its cultural service. The
interviewed households recognized the cultural value of the wetland, seeing
it as an ideal location for recreation (60.4%), spiritual activities (35.6%), and
educational and research purposes (4%) (Table 7). However, the length of
time respondents had lived in the area significantly impacted their percep-
tion of the cultural ecosystem services (P < 0.05; Table 5) and their connec-
tion to the land.

Supporting services

A large proportion of respondents acknowledge the role of Denbig Wetland
in Supporting various bird species and other wildlife, indicating that the eco-
logical importance of the wetland goes beyond its direct benefits to humans
and includes vital support for local biodiversity. The wetland provides sev-
eral supporting services, such as serving as breeding grounds (45.4%) and
habitats (50.2%) for wetland plants and animals, facilitating soil formation
through the accumulation of organic matter (45.2%), and contributing to nu-
trient cycling (57.2%) (Table 7). According to the survey, Denbiq Wetland
supports about 65 bird species, including the common crane, great white
pelican, yellow-billed duck, Egyptian goose, African jacana, wattled crane,
and crowned crane. The supporting services provided by the wetland have
an indirect impact on the local population, and understanding them requires
some ecological knowledge. The age of respondents was a significant fac-
tor influencing their perception of supporting ecosystem services (P < 0.05;
Table 6). This trend may be attributed to the fact that those with higher lev-
els of education (secondary and college) were generally between the ages
of 30 and 51, making them more capable of recognizing and understanding
the supporting services provided by the wetland.

Table 5. Respondents’ perception of cultural ecosystem services as influenced by dura-
tion of residence in Denbig wetland.

Age Cultural Service
ey : inital = Recreational | Aesthetic | Educational | Total | Chi-square (x2
<40 8 29 5 11 53 25.504*
41-50 10 9 8 13 40
>51 25 32 23 29 109
Total 43 70 55 53 202

*\2 significant at p < 0.05.

BioRisk 23: 45-61 (2025), DOI: 10.3897/biorisk.23.156866 53

Kebebush Mulat Alem: Community views, threats, and conservation plans for Denbig Wetland, Ethiopia

Table 6. Perception of supporting ecosystem services as influenced by respondents’ age.

Age categories supporting ecosystem service

(Years) Primary production | Nutrient Cycling | Soil formation | Total | Chi-square (x2
<40 18 6 33 57 21.564*
41-50 27 12 27 65
>51 38 8 33 80
Total 83 26 93 202

*\2 significant at p < 0.05.

Table 7. Main ecosystem services of Denbig wetland based on household perception.

Ecosystem service provided

1. Provisioning N % Ranks
Water for domestic use 123 60.4 3
Water for irrigation 8 40 6
Water for livestock drinking 126 70.9 1
Fodder and grazing service 35 65.3 2
Woods for fuel @ 30.5 7
Medicinal plants 11 10.2 4
Hatching grass 9 48.5 5
2. Regulating service

Temperature regulation 42 90.5 3
Water purification 44 63.6 2
Sediment retention 34 47.4 4
Erosion control 82 70.5 1
3. Cultural services

Recreational services eas 60.4

Spiritual services 72 83516

Educational and research services 8 4

4. Supporting services

Habitat 61 SU:2 Zz
Nursery 15 45.4 4
Accumulation of organic matter 51 45.2 3
Nutrient cycling 75 S7.2 1

Perception of driving forces of the degradation of denbiq wetlands

Several contributing factors have been identified as causes for the deteriora-
tion of the wetland, including farmland scarcity (22.3%), inadequate grazing
land (86%), lack of awareness (77%), unclear boundaries (70.3%), youth unem-
ployment (58.1%), absence of alternative livelihoods (51.9%), low productivity
of nearby land (30.2%), deforestation (11.2%), sedimentation (47%), and the
expansion of settlements (13.7%) (Fig. 2).

Variables such as household size, landholding size, livestock population,
and age significantly influence the Denbig wetland ecosystem, with a 99% con-
fidence level (Table 8). Among these variables, household size was negative-
ly associated on wetland sustainability (8 = -0.873, p = 0.006). This implies
that larger families are more likely to exert pressure on wetlands, possibly due
to higher resource demands (e.g., farming land, water, and grazing), thereby
contributing to wetland degradation. As family sizes increase, the likelihood
of converting wetland areas for agricultural or domestic use also increases.

BioRisk 23: 45-61 (2025), DOI: 10.3897/biorisk.23.156866 54

Kebebush Mulat Alem: Community views, threats, and conservation plans for Denbiq Wetland, Ethiopia

Precent(%) respondent

100

90

80

70

60

50 47

40

30 - 2

20 ue 2 13.7

* -

0
> S S <
A < °O Se Xe) ‘y
As Na s & & se ro S$ mo os
om XS é Oe sO oo? S ? Ss &
s oo & J g aS € oS m £
se 4% ve & & s ° iY, & &
x ° s &? s Ky ro) S S
< + Ss ° < & ~ 50
Nia <" & > wt & eo
° 2? 40 rs ba 2
+ Oo dS
No No ¢ ¢
3
S

Figure 2. Major driving forces for the degradation of Denbiq wetland based on the pro-
portion (%) of respondents.

Table 8. Binomial logistic regression for determining factors affecting wetland sustenance.

' Beta coefficient "Statistics 95% C.1 for EXP(B)
Variables

B SE df Sg EXP(B) | Lower | Upper
Location -0.209 0.873 | 1 0.658 0.82 0.183 | 3.519
Sex 1.578 0.981 1 0.217 | 3.91 0.735 | 24.35
Age | 1.932 0.808 1 0.009 9.254 1.845 14.95
Family size | -0.873 0.364 | 1 0.006 0.597 0.358 | 0.893
Educational level 1.298 1.349 | 1 0.023 3.852 0.326 | 42.463
occupation -2.147 102" |)“ 0.324 | 0.219 0.009 4.102
Landholding(ha) 3.025 0.903 | 1 0.009 8.813 1.876 | 40.703
Number of livestock 0.312 0.092 1 0.008 1.522 Loz 1.928
constant 0.237 ZO TH) Oe 0.987 1.892

a. Dependent variable: Wetland sustenance/degradation)

Conversely, the age of the household head showed a positive and significant
effect (8 = 1.93, p = 0.009). Older individuals are more likely to support wetland
conservation, possibly due to greater ecological knowledge, cultural connec-
tion, or experience with the long-term benefits of wetlands. Landholding size
was also positively associated with wetland sustainability (8 = 3.02, p = 0.009).
Households with more land are less likely to encroach upon wetlands for farm-
ing or grazing, as they have alternative areas for these activities (Table 8). This
suggests that larger household sizes are associated with a higher likelihood
of utilizing wetland resources and contributing to its degradation. The number
of livestock owned positively influenced wetland use (8 = 0.31, p = 0.008),
suggesting that livestock-dependent households are more likely to depend on
wetland resources such as water and forage. Although this relationship is pos-
itive, it also implies potential overuse, as increased livestock grazing can lead
to wetland degradation if not managed properly. These findings suggest that
demographic and socioeconomic variables play a critical role in influencing
community interactions with wetlands. Conservation strategies should there-
fore target large households, younger and less experienced land users, and
households with significant livestock holdings through education, livelihood
diversification, and wetland-friendly land-use planning.

BioRisk 23: 45-61 (2025), DOI: 10.3897/biorisk.23.156866 55

Kebebush Mulat Alem: Community views, threats, and conservation plans for Denbig Wetland, Ethiopia

Actions recommended by the local community

A significant portion of respondents were well-informed (11.4%), informed
(23.8%), or moderately informed (28.2%) about the challenges facing Den-
biq Wetland and potential solutions (Table 4). Key conservation measures
proposed by respondents include raising awareness (64%), reducing grazing
around the wetland (41%), developing buffer zones (38.39%), preventing defor-
estation (12.42%), installing shoreline fencing (49.23%), and regulating the use
of wetland water for irrigation (3%) (Table 9). Many respondents emphasized
the importance of educating both the local community and the wider public
on the numerous benefits wetlands provide, such as water purification, flood
control, supporting biodiversity, and carbon sequestration.

Table 9. Wetland conservation measures suggested by respondents.

Wetland conservation measure Frequency Percent
Awareness creation 715 64
Reducing grazing around the Wetland 53 41
Develop buffer zones 44 38.39
Avoid deforestation 24 12.42
Shoreline fencing 64 49.23
Controlling the use of wetland water for irrigation 12 S

Discussion

The study assessed community perception of ecosystem services, degrada-
tion drivers, and conservation action concerning Denbig wetland, in West Go-
jam, Ethiopia. The results confirm the wetland’s importance in supporting local
livelihoods, mainly through provisioning services such as water for irrigation,
grazing, and raw materials. This service aligns with the studies conducted in
other parts of Ethiopia, such as the Fogera and Zegie wetlands where provision-
ing service benefits dominate local use and perception (Gibru and Biru 2022;
Boru et al. 2024). Wetlands are crucial ecosystems that provide a broad range
of essential services, benefiting not only local communities but also the broad-
er environment (Thapa et al. 2020). The significant contributions of these eco-
systems to human livelihoods are well-documented in various studies (Yilma
2019; Zekarias et al. 2021; Camacho-Valdez et al. 2022).

Most respondents indicated that their primary livelihood depends on wetland'’s
resources, particularly for crop production and livestock rearing (Turyahabwe
et al. 2013; Porte and Gupta 2017). This reliance makes the community highly
vulnerable to any changes in the wetland’s ecological functions. However, while
provisioning services were most frequently mentioned, regulating and support-
ing services received limited recognition. This reflects a common trend in rural
communities where direct and tangible benefits are more easily recognized than
indirect or long-term ecological functions (Taiwo 2013; Tari et al. 2022). In addi-
tion to provisioning services, Denbig Wetland provides valuable cultural ecosys-
tem services. Traditionally, the wetland hosted local rituals, served as a recre-
ational space, and symbolized communal identity. However, respondents noted
a decline in cultural values, which they attributed to youth migration, the influ-
ence of formal education, and religious shifts. Similar patterns of cultural service

BioRisk 23: 45-61 (2025), DOI: 10.3897/biorisk.23.156866 56

Kebebush Mulat Alem: Community views, threats, and conservation plans for Denbiq Wetland, Ethiopia

degradation due to modernization and land use changes have been observed in
other wetland systems (Daw et al. 2011; Turyahabwe et al. 2013). Reviving these
services may require integrating traditional knowledge into current conservation
practices and increasing youth engagement in heritage preservation.

Institutional and policy-related gaps emerged as a critical factor in the Denbiq
Wetland. While some government and community-led conservation action existed,
their impact has been limited, by weak enforcement, unclear mandate among re-
sponsible bodies, and lack of coordination. Key drivers identified through surveys
and focus group discussions include agricultural expansion, overgrazing, sedimen-
tation, and the unsustainable use of wetland resources (Jing et al. 2008; Noriko
et al. 2012). Focus group participants and key informants noted the wetland’s de-
clining size and water levels, which they attribute to agricultural activities and un-
sustainable practices. Respondents expressed concerns over the absence of clear
wetland ownership and accountability, leading to open access exploitation. Nation-
al policies such as Ethiopia's Wetland Strategy under the Ministry of Water and
Energy provide frameworks, but implementation at the local level remains insuffi-
cient. The need for stronger institutional mechanisms, including community-based
governance and inter-sectoral coordination, is evident and has been emphasized in
other wetland governance literature (Wood and Baker 2023; De Oliveira et al. 2024).

Drivers of degradation identified by communities include agricultural en-
croachment, overgrazing, siltation, and vegetation clearance. These findings
are consistent with studies that link wetland degradation in Ethiopia to inten-
sified land use and weak land tenure systems (Marambanyika et al. 2021). Cli-
mate variability also plays a role, particularly with changing rainfall patterns
affecting water availability. Addressing these drivers requires a blend of techni-
cal interventions such as restoration and buffer zone establishment and institu-
tional measures like land use planning and environmental education.

Despite efforts by some local actors to initiate conservation, the study re-
vealed limited awareness of ecosystem service trade-offs and degradation
consequences. This gap underscores the importance of participatory ap-
proaches in wetland management, where local knowledge is integrated with
scientific expertise. Strengthening awareness through community training,
participatory mapping, and school-based environmental programs could fos-
ter long-term stewardship. Finally, while the study provided valuable insights
into community perceptions and priorities, it is important to acknowledge its
limitations. The data were collected during a single season and may not reflect
temporal variations in ecosystem service use or degradation intensity. In addi-
tion, perspectives from stakeholders outside the immediate community such
as regional planners or NGOs were not fully explored. Future research could
expand on these areas, incorporate longitudinal data, and examine ecological
assessments in tandem with socio-economic insights.

Conclusion

Denbigq Wetland plays a vital role in providing essential ecosystem services that
support the well-being and livelihoods of local communities, including provision-
ing, regulating, cultural, and supporting functions. However, the wetland is facing
significant degradation due to unsustainable practices such as overgrazing, ag-
ricultural expansion, sedimentation, and overuse of resources. Despite its value,

BioRisk 23: 45-61 (2025), DOI: 10.3897/biorisk.23.156866 57

Kebebush Mulat Alem: Community views, threats, and conservation plans for Denbig Wetland, Ethiopia

the wetland is rapidly deteriorating endangering biodiversity and human welfare.
Encouragingly, a large majority of households expressed willingness to support
conservation and restoration efforts. Suggested interventions include enhanc-
ing upland cropland productivity, creating alternative livelihoods, raising aware-
ness, installing shoreline fencing, and conserving the wetland. A comprehensive
approach that combines restoration, sustainable management, and communi-
ty-based strategies is essential for preserving the Denbig wetland and ensuring its
long-term health and ecosystem services. The key finding of this study is the need
for stronger institutional coordination and enforcement mechanisms. Current
governance frameworks do not adequately address wetland related challenges,
leaving these ecosystems vulnerable to exploitation. Study Limitation: The data
collection was conducted in a single season, which may not capture temporal
variations in wetland usage. Future effort must incorporate community engage-
ment, clear regulatory frameworks, and consistent monitoring. Future research
should consider longitudinal approach and evaluate the impact of climate variabil-
ity. In conclusion, preserving Denbigq Wetland requires an integrated strategy that
balances ecological integrity with local socio-economic realities. With appropriate
policy support, community participation, and sustainable practices, the wetland
can continue to provide essential ecosystem services for generations to come.

Acknowledgments

The author would like to thank the Bure Woreda Agriculture and Rural Develop-
ment Office and its experts for their help in field studies and for giving relevant
information in written documents, and reports, which helped this research.

Additional information

Conflict of interest

The author has declared that no competing interests exist.

Ethical statement

No ethical statement was reported.

Use of Al

No use of Al was reported.

Funding

No funding was reported.

Author contributions
All the activities are done by Kebebush Mulat.

Author ORCIDs
Kebebush Mulat Alem © https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6537-4669

Data availability

Data supporting this study are available from the corresponding author upon
reasonable request.

BioRisk 23: 45-61 (2025), DOI: 10.3897/biorisk.23.156866 58

Kebebush Mulat Alem: Community views, threats, and conservation plans for Denbig Wetland, Ethiopia

References

Aazami M, Shanazi K (2020) Tourism wetlands and rural sustainable livelihood: The
case from Iran. Journal of Outdoor Recreation and Tourism 30: 100284. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.jort.2020.100284

Adamu HA, Ahemed YA, Dewes J, Bolshinsky |, Tozser S, Moses S, Gaines K, Chakrov
P (2019) Report on preparations and activities leading to the shipment of irradiated
HEU fuel of the Nigeria Research Reactor-1 from Nigeria to China. Proceedings of the
European Research Reactor Conference (RRFM 2019), March 2019, Jordan.

Anderson JT, Davis CA (2013) Wetland Techniques, Vol. 3: Applications and Manage-
ment. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-6907-6

Boru KA, Ingale LT, Lemt KM (2024) Wetland ecosystem: Plant species diversity, ser-
vices, degradation drivers, and community perception in Sinana district, Oromia re-
gion, southeast Ethiopia. Nature Environment & Pollution Technology 23(1): 55-68.
https://doi.org/10.46488/nept.2024.v23i01.004

Camacho-Valdez V, Rodiles-Hernandez R, Navarrete-Gutiérrez DA, Valencia-Barrera E (2022)
Tropical wetlands and land use changes: The case of oil palm in neotropical riverine
floodplains. PLoS ONE 17(5): e€0266677. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0266677

Darwall W, Bremerich V, Wever A, Dell Al, Freyhof J, Gessner MO, Grossart H, Harrison
|, Irvine K, Jahnig SC, Jeschke JM, Lee JJ, Lu C, Lewandowska AM, Monaghan MT,
Nejstgaard JC, Patricio H, Schmidt-Kloiber A, Stuart SN, Thieme M, Tockner K, Turak
E, Weyl O (2018) The Alliance for Freshwater Life: A global call to unite efforts for
freshwater biodiversity science and conservation. Aquatic Conservation 28(4):
1015-1022. https://doi.org/10.1002/aqce.2958

Daw T, Brown K, Rosendo S, Pomeroy R (2011) Applying the ecosystem services con-
cept to poverty alleviation: The need to disaggregate human well-being. Environmen-
tal Conservation 38(4): 370-379. https://doi.org/10.1017/S037689291 1000506

De Oliveira M, Morrison T, O’Brien KR, Lovelock CE (2024) Governance of coastal wet-
lands: Beyond the community conservation paradigm. Ocean and Coastal Manage-
ment 255: 107253. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2024.107253

Erkihun T, Getaneh G, Assaye M (2015) Prevalence of bovine trypanosomosis in Bure
and Womberma Districts of West Gojjam Zone, North West Ethiopia. Acta Parasi-
tologica Globalis 6(3): 164-173. https://doi.org/10.5829/idosi.apg.2015.6.3.95146

Gebresllassie H, Gashaw T, Mehari A (2014) Wetland degradation in Ethiopia: Causes,
consequences and remedies. Journal of Environment and Earth Science 4(11): 40-
48. https://www.iiste.org/Journals/index.php/JEES/article/view/13989

Gibru A, Biru Y (2022) Assessment of bird species composition, relative abundance,
and distributions in East Gojjam wetland habitats, Ethiopia. International Journal of
Zoology 2022: 1-9. https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/2802998

Giweta M (2018) Reversing the degradation of Ethiopian wetlands: Is it unachievable
phrase or a call to effective action? International Journal of Environmental Sciences &
Natural Resources 14(5): 555898. https://doi.org/10.19080/IJESNR.2018.14.555898

Gujarati DN (2004) Basic Econometrics. 4" edn. McGraw-Hill/Irwin, New York, 169-217.

Hoe LI, Lian CJ (2021) Legal framework on the conservation issue of Pulau Kukup Na-
tional Park in Johor, Malaysia. Journal of Sustainability Science and Management
16(5): 115-123. https://doi.org/10.46754/JSSM.2021.07.009

Jing Q, Bouman B, van Keulen H, Hengsdijk H, Cao W, Dai T (2008) Disentangling the
effect of environmental factors on yield and nitrogen uptake of irrigated rice in Asia.
Agricultural Systems 98(3): 177-188. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agsy.2008.06.005

BioRisk 23: 45-61 (2025), DOI: 10.3897/biorisk.23.156866 59

Kebebush Mulat Alem: Community views, threats, and conservation plans for Denbig Wetland, Ethiopia

Junk WJ, An S, Finlayson CM, Gopal B, Kvet J, Mitchell SA, Mitsch WJ, Robarts RD
(2013) Current state of knowledge regarding the world’s wetlands and their future
under global climate change: A synthesis. Aquatic Sciences 75: 151-167. https://doi.
org/10.1007/s00027-012-0278-z

Kakuru W, Turyahabwe N, Mugisha J (2013) Total economic value of wetlands products
and services in Uganda. The Scientific World Journal 2013(1): 192656. https://doi.
org/10.1155/2013/192656

Lamsal P, Pant KP Kumar L, Atreya K (2015) Sustainable livelihoods through conserva-
tion of wetland resources: A case of economic benefits from Ghodaghodi Lake, west-
ern Nepal. Ecology and Society 20(1): 10. https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-07172-200110

Marambanyika T, Mupfiga UN, Musasa T, Ngwenya K (2021) Local perceptions on the
impact of drought on wetland ecosystem services and associated household live-
lihood benefits: The case of the Driefontein Ramsar Site in Zimbabwe. Land 10(6):
587. https://doi.org/10.3390/land10060587

Martinez-Juarez P, Chiabai A, Taylor T, G6mez SQ (2015) The impact of ecosystems on
human health and well-being: A critical review. Journal of Outdoor Recreation and
Tourism 10: 63-69. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jort.2015.06.008

Noriko N, Elfidasari D, Perdana AT, Wulandari N, Wijayanti W (2012) Analisis peng-
gunaan dan syarat mutu minyak goreng pada penjaja makanan di Food Court
UAI. Jurnal Al-Azhar Indonesia Seri Sains dan Teknologi 1(3): 147 https://doi.
org/10.36722/sst.v1i3.52

Porte DS, Gupta S (2017) Nesting behaviour of Indian pond heron, Ardeola grayii (Sykes,
1832) at Ratanpur, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh, India. Indian Journal of Applied &
Pure Biology 32(1): 31-42.

Taiwo OJ (2013) Farmers’ choice of wetland agriculture: Checking wetland loss and deg-
radation in Lagos State, Nigeria. GeoJournal 78: 103-115. https://doi.org/10.1007/
$10708-011-9434-6

Tari VS, Gupta R, Siddiqui N (2022) Handbook of research on monitoring and evalu-
ating the ecological health of wetlands. IG] Global, Hershey, 92-105. https://doi.
org/10.4018/978-1-7998-9498-8.ch006

Thapa S, Wang L, Koirala A, Shrestha S, Bhattarai S, Aye WN (2020) Valuation of
ecosystem services from an important wetland of Nepal: A study from Begnas
Watershed System. Wetlands 40(5): 1071-1083. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13157-
020-01303-7

Turyahabwe N, Kakuru W, Tweheyo M, Tumusiime DM (2013) Contribution of wetland
resources to household food security in Uganda. Agriculture & Food Security 2(1): 5.
https://doi.org/10.1186/2048-7010-2-5

Wallace KJ (2007) Classification of ecosystem services: Problems and solutions. Biolog-
ical Conservation 139(3-4): 235-246. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2007.07.015

Wondie A (2018) Ecological conditions and ecosystem services of wetlands in the
Lake Tana Area, Ethiopia. Ecohydrology & Hydrobiology 18(2): 231-244. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.ecohyd.2018.02.002

Wood RL, Baker MA (2023) Assessing nutrient assimilation by wetland impoundments
across environmental gradients. Wetlands 43(6): 66. https://doi.org/10.1007/
$13157-023-01711-5

Xu T, Weng B, Yan D, Wang K, Li X, Bi W, Li M, Cheng X, Liu Y (2019) Wetlands of inter-
national importance: Status, threats, and future protection. International Journal of
Environmental Research and Public Health 16(10): 1818. https://doi.org/10.3390/
ijerph16101818

BioRisk 23: 45-61 (2025), DOI: 10.3897/biorisk.23.156866 60

Kebebush Mulat Alem: Community views, threats, and conservation plans for Denbiq Wetland, Ethiopia

Yamane S (1976) Morphological and taxonomic studies on the vespine larvae, with ref-
erence to the phylogeny of the subfamily Vespinae (Hymenoptera: Vespidae). Insecta
Matsumurana New Series 8: 1-45.

Yilma G (2019) Socio-economic contribution of Rift Valley aquatic and wetlands to the
local community and the national economy: The case of Lake Hawassa and asso-
ciated wetlands, in the southern part of Ethiopia. International Journal of Environ-
mental Sciences & Natural Resources 22(5): 155-163. https://doi.org/10.19080/
IJESNR.2019.22.556096

Zekarias T, Govindu V, Kebede Y, Gelaw A (2021) Geospatial analysis of wetland dynam-
ics on Lake Abaya-Chamo, the Main Rift Valley of Ethiopia. Heliyon 7(9): e07943.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2021.e07943

BioRisk 23: 45-61 (2025), DOI: 10.3897/biorisk.23.156866 61